Want to improve transit agency performance? Campaign to get them a huge gift
Nothing puts a transit agency in the spotlight like asking for a ton of money or bold preferential policy changes
In the fight for better transit, there are countless fronts and battles where advocates can engage. They are all worth winning. Whether it is a fight for federal funding for transit operations, a state-effort to cut transit infrastructure red tape, local efforts to get a city to build a bus-only lane, or an effort to push for more efficient spending within a transit agency– it is all winnable and worth winning.
However, the state of transit advocacy in America today is such that there are way more battles to be fought than there are advocates able to lead those fights. As a movement, we do not have enough players on the field to go after each opportunity to win transit improvements. Which means that while transit advocates train up more advocates to become leaders, we need to be strategic and selective of the fights we fight.
One way to evaluate potential fights worth engaging in is to consider what other organizers might step in to lead an effort to address the problem. For example, while a transit advocate might recognize that a way to boost transit use is to upzone land near transit stops, they can trust that pro-housing advocates will likely lead an effort on that. The transit advocate can choose to follow the housing advocate’s lead, play a small support role, or even just sit out that effort and put their attention elsewhere. This can work pretty well on efforts related to housing, affordability, and justice as they relate to the transit agency.
However, this gets tricky around issues of transit agency accountability as the other people most likely to push for accountability measures tend to be anti-transit folks arguing in bad faith. That’s a problem because either these anti-transit advocates push for some bad policy and shift the conversation in that direction. Or the anti-transit advocates pick an accountability fight where they have a good point, but are dismissed since they are transit-haters. Transit agencies can be better when it is their friends rather than their enemies that try to hold them accountable.
As friends of transit, it is also on us to supportively hold agencies accountable when they fall short and push for solutions. Most transit agency problems stem from the fact that it is expensive to be poor and that these agencies get very little attention by the general public and those in power. As advocates, it is hard to get the media, politicians or the public to pay attention to (and thus fix) inefficiencies of a small and struggling agency. Scandalous lawbreaking by a transit agency is easier to get people to pay attention to, but anything short of criminal issues, can get shrugged off.
You can thrust a transit agency into the spotlight, warts and all, when you push for audacious pro-transit changes. When you demand a large shift in outside resources for transit agencies (funding, policy changes, or road space), people come out of the woodwork. Some come out because they are pro-transit people and they want to help win the campaign. Others come out because they oppose your vision. Both help in the long run to improve transit agency performance.
The opponents help you win improved transit agency performance as they will try to flag every flaw they can with your transit agency, demanding they be fixed before giving the agency a dime. If they flag anything you also agree should be fixed, great! The solution to that problem is probably funding anyway, so you can evolve your demands to be for extra funding with some earmarked to that issue.
The new supporters can help you win improved performance because the more advocates that are invested in the success of the agency, the more players you have on the field who can eventually take leadership on an accountability issue. So after the initial organizing pulse to win more state funding to the agency, you will have advocates around who are now more invested in the performance of that agency. Ideally, the agency will be especially open to constructive critiques and recommendations from these advocates as the advocates have just gone to bat for the agency.
Of course, depending on the agency in question, they might not actually want you to put them in the spotlight and launch a big campaign to get them more funding and attention. To be frank– it is ok if you still go for it anyway. The transit agency might have grown complacent and forgotten how to think & dream big. Launching an audacious campaign will help start to shake them from that stupor.
In short, for the question of “do we ramp up funding for a flawed transit system first and then try to fix it OR do we fix the flaws first and then fund the agency?” Ramp up advocacy for transit and you will get both.
Need help winning better transit service and/or safer streets? I’m here to help! Whether you want a 1-on-1 training session or a group workshop, let’s talk. Email me at Carter@carterlavin.com to set something up. Here’s a bit about what training sessions are like.
Free upcoming online events
2/21 @ 5:30pm PT— Transit Activism Training: “How to make your transit fantasies reality” in special partnership with the “The Transit Guy” Hayden Clarkin, founder of TransitCon. Learn more and register here.
In the Bay Area and got your ballot? Check out the “Transportation Questionnaire” which got responses from 65 candidates across the 9 County Bay Area and see what the people vying for your vote have to say on transportation issues. You can view the responses by region here: East Bay Candidates, North Bay Candidates, Peninsula Candidates, San Francisco Candidates, and South Bay Candidates. The project was co-led with SPUR, Seamless Bay Area, San Francisco Transit Riders, Silicon Valley Bike Coalition, and Bike East Bay
Interested in sponsoring the training of an activist working on an issue you’re passionate about? Let’s chat. Carter@carterlavin.com